Am I missing something ?

[klee]

Good Afternoon

 

I ve always enjoyed collecting Muromachi/Sue Bizen  blades and I know they are usually associated with being less desirable compared to older koto blades. 

 

However, I ve noticed this year that Sue Bizen blades are being priced very high and I notice they tend to get bought fairly quickly. Here are 3 I found that are currently listed.

 

https://nihontou.jp/choice03/toukenkobugu/katana/1722/00.html

https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A010125.html

https://www.toukenkomachi.com/index_en_tachi&katana_A051124.html

 

They have all been listed this year, all Hozon and I dont know why they are priced around 1 million yen. Am I missing something ???

 

Hozon Sue Bizen blades were nowhere this price range when I purchased my last Kiyomitsu last year.

 

 

- Kevin L

 

 

 

 

[Rivkin]

Basic thing to check is what are the cheapest items in the store. Price is a relative thing in collectibles, more so than in other fields.

Otherwise - sue Bizen can be great. Kiyomitsu and early Sukesada in particular. I don't think it applies here. Jigane is rough. Middle one at least carries some fun.

[sabiji]

Honestly - and I'm sure I'm not making any friends - but I can count the really good Sue Bizen works I've seen in recent years on one hand.

 

I know that Sukesada & Co can do it and then I think, holy sh..., what a great blade!

 

But most of what you find, including the linked swords, are (in my eyes) weapons, nothing more. Robust swords with a sharp edge, conceptless hada with rough weld seams and conceptless hamon, a hardening that often looks rather uncontrolled. One should not try to see anything artistic in this.

 

Of course you can find something like this interesting and collect it, that is completely legitimate. And if dealers are asking such prices, then there seems to be a corresponding clientele.

 

[klee]

Thomas

 

I love Sue Bizen blades ( esp Kiyomitsu ) and I 100% I agree with your view.

 

I love the time period and the practical nature of their blades and I always enjoyed finding the few good ones out of the many rough samples. My most prized possession is a Tokubetsu Hozon kiyomitsu I purchased last year for roughly the same price as the ones above.

 

It s just so surprising for me to see ones like above being priced in the same range as Tokubetsu Hozon Late Kamakura/Nanbokucho works. I am both happy to see that people find the appeal in them but also bummed at how high the prices are lol.

 

One thing I can understand is the appeal of Ubu signed koto works. For some reason mumei suriage/O-suriage blade has started to bother me a bit lately. I think it s the idea of something being greatly altered and never being 100% certain of it s maker/school.

 

Thank you for your input on the thread 🙏

 

-Kevin L

[Mushin]

  Quote

 

Expand  

First, you’re absolutely right—prices for Sue Bizen blades, as well as high-quality late Mino works, are rising across the board at Japanese dealers. A big part of this is that older,  historically desirable blades from the Kamakura and Nanbokucho periods are becoming increasingly scarce. As we’ve seen in recent auction sales, the prices for these top-tier swords are skyrocketing. Naturally, collectors and dealers are now turning their attention to what’s out there and looking for the next big "thing."

Late Muromachi-period blades, long overlooked and often dismissed, are beginning to get the recognition they deserve. I’ve always found it curious that while scholars have traditionally celebrated Oei and early Muromachi Bizen blades, all of the Saijō-saku (highest-rated) Bizen smiths listed by Fujishiro actually come from the early Sengoku period: Hikobei and Yosozaemon Sukesada, as well as Ukyo no Suke and Jirozaemon Katsumitsu. In fact, every Saijō-saku smith from the Muromachi period—Muramasa, NoSada, Magoroku Kanemoto—belongs to this same era. (Full disclosure, I've long collected Katsumitsu family swords in addition to Soshu blades.)

With high-end Sōshū and related works nearly gone from the market, and top-quality Ko-Bizen and Nanbokuchō Bizen works increasingly difficult to find, attention is now shifting to top quality Muromachi and Sue Bizen blades—especially those that are fully signed. NoSada and Magoroku Kanemoto are getting serious interest, too.

Just 10 years ago, you could pick up a moroha tanto by Sukesada or Katsumitsu for $6,000–$10,000. Now? Try finding one for under $20,000. And if you’re looking for a Sue Bizen blade that is signed, dated, ubu, in good condition, not machi-okure, with a single mekugi-ana and a horimono—you’ll probably need a note from your bank manager to be able to buy it.

Many myths have circulated about Sue Bizen blades over the years—most of them unfounded. If you still doubt their value as premier works of the era, I recommend reading the account of Katsumitsu-Munemitsu and the warlord Akamatsu Masanori.

Personally, I’m glad these blades are finally being seen through fresh eyes. Fully-inscribed works with complete names and dates by these smiths have always been exceptional. I expect their prices will continue to climb—until, like the great swords before them, they’re locked away in private collections or viewable only in display cases at places like Touken World. Daito by Murmasa have long vanished from the scene after the market was cornered by rich Japanese collectors. Now, good luck finding long swords by Sukesada, Katsumitsu and NoSada. That's partly because they didn't make many because of the katateuchi craze, but they did make them, you just can't find them. Happy hunting!

[klee]

@Mushin

 

Thank you for the great bits of insight !

 

Can I ask a question since you collect sue bizen as well ?

 

Is it reasonable to assume a particular smith made a blade according to the time period in the meikan and also Markus Sesskos version ?

 

I ask because I like to collect Kiyomitsu and I bought a piece at the end of last year dated Eisho 10. According to the Meikan and Sessko, there is only one Kiyomitsu at the time. Is associating the blade to a smith a reasonable assumption based on this ? The dealer says yes but im sure it s probably a lot of "dealer speak "

 

Another thing that makes it difficult is that the blade is signed "Bishu Osafune Kiyomitsu Saku"and the meikan states that he did  sign this way on some pieces instead of using his actual name.

 

Im not sure if there are Katsumitus that fall in this category

 

Thank you for your Insight

 

-Kevin L

 

 

[Mushin]

The short answer to your question is yes. But that assumes there was only one smith using that name at the time, and that we absolutely know that as a fact, which often we don’t.
 

For example, we now know of blades signed by a very young Jirozaemon Katsumitsu in 1489 which is much earlier than his stated work period listed in Fujishiro and other sources. So, if you have a blade signed simply Bishu no Kuni Ju Osafune Katsumitsu and dated 1489, you would probably think it was the work of the main master of the time, Jirozaemon’s father, Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu, but you might be wrong.

 

There are periods, especially in the later Muromachi, when smithing families ran large studios with slews of smiths using the same “generic” signature. In this, the Sukesadas and Kiyomitsus had some of the largest and most prolific production houses of their day to meet the demand for both mass produced and special order pieces. And lots of their work includes these inferior pieces, leading many to dismiss Sue Bizen as junk.

 

This is why hardcore Sue Bizen collectors focus on and pay more for blades with Zokumyo Mei, which I will roughly translate as “full signatures” using their common art names, like Ukyo no Suke Katsumitsu, or Gorozaemon no Jo Kiyomitsu. These tend to be a key determining factor separating their top-of-the-line special order blades from early export pieces to China at the turn of the 16th century and later mass production “bundle swords” for rank and file troops during the height of the Sengoku Jidai. They are also a key factor in determining price. Fully signed and dated pieces are fewer in number, of higher quality, and thus the premium.

 

(If I recall correctly, I remember reading somewhere that the Kiyomitsu line were not prodigious users of Zokuyomei but you should double check that.)  

 

So, if Markus has only one smith working at the time, chances are you are probably right that that’s the smith who made your blade, but not necessarily so.
 

That is why it is so important to study the working periods and nuances of these smiths so you might be able to recognize the hand behind the generic work. To do that you must study Zokumyo Mei pieces carefully where you can find them.

 

In Honma sensei’s Kanto Hibi Sho, (translations are available from Markus) you will see him parse the work of these smiths carefully, explaining why thinks a generic Sue Bizen blade might be the work of a particular smith in a studio.

 

Like everything thing else in this crazy hobby, it takes time, book study and exposure to as many blades as you can find.

[Mushin]

Thought this was worth including as it illustrates what I was saying. 
https://web.archive.org/web/20230607163725/http://touken-matsumoto.jp/en/product/shousai/WA-0582

[Jacques]

I think that comparing the price of a sword with “others” is a common mistake among westerners. A sword should be judged only on its qualities (and possibly its defects). Two swords from the same smith are not necessarily of the same level of quality, and a price difference can be justified. That's largely why I say that buying a sword without having held it in your hands is irrelevant.